Відео

Great video and discussion! I'd just say...I was raised with the parenting style you mentioned of parents who spank. Who spank when their toddler gets out of bed after being told "no" type of thing. My mother was the main disciplinarian, and she used spanking as her go-to all through my upbringing. I have to say, I was raised well and look up to her greatly. She's been with the Lord for eight years now (she died very young), but she's been my role model and she led me to the Lord. And we were best friends even though she was quite strict. Just goes to show things can be more complex and nuanced than many believe. Also, as far as a literal "rod", the word in Hebrew is often translated a reedlike rod. Which would mean a switch or maybe a wooden spoon. Look at Christian parenting books and you'll find plenty of clarification!

Stop trying to justify child abuse...

at the start you really say the goal is that the Gospel is what you want your kids to know and how to follow. not a trick Question but what is your definition of the Gospel and the word of the Gospel?

*Promosm*

It's interesting how today's version of "tithing" has no biblical precedent. Monetizing the tithe as a deliverable was man's idea after the Bible was written.

It says that "tongues" are real, rational languages. Here's a linguist's take on the tongues phenomenon..... There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" - and there is only one type - when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); usually, but not always, unknown to those listening to them, but always known by the speaker(s) - it’s their native language (in some cases, it is a language the speaker has learned). In contrast, the “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing underlying sounds (called phonemes) of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with. It is, in part, typically characterized by repetitive syllables, plays on sound patterns, alliteration, assonance, and over-simplification of syllable structure. It is also interesting to note that any and all phonological rules (rules governing how sounds are put together in a given language - what is allowed and what is disallowed) governing a speaker's native language, will _also_ govern their tongues-speech. Further, this subset of phonemes mentioned above typically contains only those sounds which are easiest to produce physiologically. Occasionally some speakers will use two or more subsets of phonemes to generate glossolalia, producing what, to them, sounds like two (or more) distinct “tongues languages”, thus claiming to be able to speak in “divers tongues”. There is absolutely _nothing_ that “tongues-speakers” are producing that cannot be explained in relatively simple linguistic terms. Conversely, when it comes to something spoken, there are absolutely _no_ Biblical references to “tongues” that do not refer to, and cannot be explained in light of, real rational language(s), though it may not be the explanation you want to hear, and it may be one which is radically different from what you believe, or were taught. _Nowhere in the Bible is modern tongues-speech advocated or evidenced._ “Praying in the Spirit” does _not_ refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. I'm not doubting or questioning the 'tongues experience'; glossolalia as the spiritual tool that it is, can be very powerful and, for many people, the experience is profound. As one commenter put it, “Speaking in tongues distracts the ego/analytical/conscious mind while leaving the subconscious (the heart) wide open to import the divine." Both the spiritual and physical benefits of using this tool are also well documented. Again though, it is important to note that this same statement can be made for virtually _any_ other culture that practices glossolalia. Religious and cultural differences aside, the glossolalia an Evenki Shaman in Siberia, a vodoun priestess in Togo and a Christian tongues-speaker in Alabama are producing are in no way different from each other. They’re all producing their glossolalia in the exact same way; they just have different explanations and beliefs as to why they’re doing it, and where it comes from. It is only in certain Christian denominations where is it construed as something it never was. For many tongues-speakers, a lot of it seems to be about perception. To use an analogy, why is that when people with Schizophrenia say that someone is watching and following them, we tend to think it’s paranoia, but when your mum says it, you go to the police? Same perception and associated claim (i.e. each perceive that someone is watching and following them) The (probable) validity and meaning of the claim hinges and changes on the difference in the physical state and capacity of who is doing the perceiving and claiming. Same as with glossolalia - it’s validity, so to speak, tends to hinge on how it is perceived by the individual from what they are experiencing….or, perhaps even more so, what they were _taught_ to experience. I tend to think it’s a bit of both. ‘Tongues’ (read, *‘languages’* ) - the divine gift, is the God given ability to effortlessly learn to speak and be understood through real-language barriers. It is not xenoglossy, nor is it modern tongues-speech. As a point of note, I’m a Linguist, and let me also add here that I am neither a so-called ‘cessationist’ nor a ‘continuationist’ - I do not identify with either term; in fact, I had never heard the two terms until just late in 2016. As far as I’m concerned, quite frankly, since the Biblical reference of “tongues” is to real, rational languages, obviously “tongues” haven’t “ceased”. It’s always a bit interesting to see how different tongues-speakers skate around what for them is that awkward discrepancy between the real, rational languages of Pentecost and the so-called “prayer language “ of Paul’s letter to the Corinthians by instituting various “types” of “tongues”. There is only one type of “tongue(s)” in the Bible when referring to something spoken - real rational language(s).